You report (20 June) that Jens Stoltenberg, secretary general of Nato, is concerned about divisions among members. Apparently, Nato has achieved “peace and security for our nations and our nearly 1 billion citizens”. While not underplaying the dangers from cyberwarfare and terrorism, Nato brings its own dangers. Take the development of the 3,000 F-35 fighter jets (manufactured by the US company Lockheed Martin), designed to unleash a huge destructive force. There are several version of this plane but the F-35As will be able to carry B61 nuclear gravity bombs. These F35s will be the most advanced jets in history and are planned to dominate the airspace of the world. But they won’t deter a single terrorist.
Far from bringing peace, these aircraft held by Nato allies, including the UK – which is buying 48, with possibly 90 more – will bring increased tensions and risks to peoples across the world with a continuing nuclear arms race. Add to that the vast cost, in which the UK will share, but which will be controlled by Lockheed Martin and the US administration. Rampant military spending on this scale is not bringing security to the world. And meanwhile children, women and men die from lack of food and clean water.
Rae Street
Littleborough, Lancashire
• Who is the target of this new European military force (UK to join EU states in Euro military force, 26 June)? A far better policy would be to greatly strengthen the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe. With 57 members, it is the world’s largest intergovernmental security organisation, dealing with arms control, promotion of human rights, freedom of the press, and fair elections. Yet it is almost unknown to the public. Operating on a fraction of the budget of Nato, it has had significant success (and, admittedly, some failures) in former Soviet countries, the Balkans and elsewhere. With more resources it could do much more.
The EU’s first aim is “to promote peace, its values and the wellbeing of its peoples”. That will not be achieved by more arms and more armed forces. It is time to put the focus on human security rather than military security. The OSCE approach – diplomacy, conflict resolution and conciliation – is the real way forward, pre-empting crises rather than reacting when a dangerous situation has aleady arisen.
Frank Jackson
Former co-chair, World Disarmament Campaign, Harlow, Essex
• Join the debate – email guardian.letters@theguardian.com
• Read more Guardian letters – click here to visit gu.com/letters
